There are various ways to model/capture Processes and to derive the enablers … and any gaps from “good enough” or “better than good enough” or “always dependable” or SixSigma … or better yet NineSigma… etc. Those can be used to derive the enablers – so the more detail there – upstream – the better that derivation downstream will be.

It takes an understanding of all of the Stakeholders’ Requirements to understand the acceptability of your current performance. And it is a comparison with your competitors – any of your customers’ alternatives in getting their needs met – that drives your own Future State improvement goals. To look at current issues in meeting those current customer requirements/needs AND our own future improvement requirements/needs.

And then … as ROI and our limited resources to pursue performance improvement allow … the next task is to look to the upstream Enabler Systems – which is structured a little differently in every organization – and see what their process capabilities are versus the needs downstream. And for the gaps.

Here is my adaptation of the Ishikawa Diagram … I come at this all from a people perspective but not necessarily a people focus.

In my experience … it is the lack of a Process – or a faulty Process (poor design: too rigid, too flexible, not blended, etc.) that is at the root of the issue … most of the time. Not the Enablers … including the people. Not always – but most of the time. It is the Process. The variation in Results, in Outputs and Outcomes … is in the Process.

And certainly it – the Performance Issue or Future Goal Issue – is not often due to a lack of Knowledge/Skill of the Performers – where Learning & Development (L&D) comes in – to address only 1 of the 12 variables … in my version of the Ishikawa Diagram.

Unless it was “unclear expectations” – which is really at root in the Data & Information segment of this model…

If the Process is OK – I would tend to next look at the Environmental Assets – to see what deficiencies exist there – and look upstream for the responsible supplier – internal and/or external.

And then I apply this very same model to them … to determine why they are deficient in meeting the downstream customers’ requirements. Look at their Processes, then their Environment Assets, and then their Human Assets.

Then – last – I would look to the Performers – and look at the 5 sets of variables – where 4 are in the control of the Recruiting & Selection System … and where ONLY 1 of these 5 and 1 of the overall 12 – is in the control/realm of L&D.

L&D. or Learning, or Training, or Knowledge Management or whatever it is called in your Enterprise, addresses but 1 of 12 variables.

And most often/too often … L&D is asked/expected to affect too many with too much in too short an interval – and as a one-off.

Yeah, good luck with that. Check the metric of “negative ROI” for your scorecard results.

And asking L&D to fix problems in the Recruiting/Selection System is problematic.

Asking L&D to fix Process Definition MIAs is also problematic. As with fixing missing tools, Social Tools and/or more welders, etc., is also problematic.

We can suggest – if we have any credibility – or a Process that helps the client logically conclude something themselves – but we are not in a position to make decisions.

We can suggest a process and tool-set to do so for ourselves.

There are always many potential Solution-Set combinations in the typical Improvement effort – and L&D might be called upon to explain all of those and help people adapt to the new applications and climb the learning curve created by change better-faster-cheaper. But this issue typically doesn’t revolve around L&D.

L&D is a support organization. We don’t even own most Performance Support – if your idea of Performance Support might include replacing those shovels with bulldozers and backhoes. That might be more important and way better than any laminated Job Aids on every shovel.

Book Resource

This book from 2011 covers my approach – developed in over 30 years experiences in helping my clients move purposefully – evolving – from Training – to Performance-based Training (L&D) – to Performance Improvement Consulting …

It’s Not All About Learning

It's All About Performance Competence - at the Individual level, the Team level, the Process level, the Organization level, the Value Chain level and at the Societal level ... or Worker, Work, Workplace and World.

ISPI’s 2010 Honorary Life Member Award Recipient

In an Enterprise Learning Context

I Prefer the Facilitated Group Process for Speed and Accuracy

performance-based CAD and MCD

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Requests for Training – What & When to Expect and What & When to Suspect

Guy has served 80+ clients including over 45 F500 firms since November 1982.

Recipient of the ISPI - the International Society for Performance Improvement - Honorary Life Member Award - 2010 - for contributions to the Society and to the Technology for Performance Improvement (PI).

Founding member of ASQ’s Influential Voices Initiative - 2010. Served through 2015.

Guy W. Wallace collaborates with his Clients using predictable, visible, proven processes on time and on budget.

Client work won awards for AT&T, General Motors, HP and Siemens Building Technologies.

Guy's 39 years in the performance improvement/ training/ learning business have been focused in 2 key areas:

1- analysis of the organization and its business processes to derive the "Learning Requirements" from the "Performance Requirements" and...

2- design/architecting the configuration of instructional and informational content.

Guy conducts performance improvement projects, Curriculum Architecture Design projects, instructional Design/Development projects, and develops and coaches client staff in his ISD and Performance Improvement methods, processes, and use of his tools and techniques - both formally and informally.

What Learners/ Performers Need

Click Here for Free PowerPoint Show Downloads

Paths-Menus-Guides-Maps for Training and Learning and Knowledge Management

A 1987 On-Boarding Story – Ramping Up a New Product Manager’s Performance Competence – Quickly

When Shortening the Time to Performance Competence is a Critical Business Issue with Worthy ROI. Click on Image for the Post

Measured Results Requires Meaningful Measurements

Click on Image for the Post

12 Process Performance Variables in the EPPI Model

Guy W. Wallace – Consulting Since 1982

Curriculum Architecture Design – Since 1982

Performance Competence Development Paths vs Learning Paths - the difference is in the Analysis.

Recipient of ISPI’s 2010 Honorary Life Member Award

The top ISPI award, was awarded for contributions to both the technology of performance improvement and to the Society - as unanimously approved by two consecutive boards of the Society. Awarded in 2010.

HPT Treasures – for Evidence Based Performance Improvement

Developing L&D Content for Performance Impact

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

If You Could Bring Others Up Closer to the Levels of Your Current State Master Performers – What Would Be the ROI?

The PACT Processes for performance-based T&D, L&D and Knowledge Management

lean-ISD : Effective and Efficient and Focused on the Performance Competence Requirements

There Is Too Much Foo Foo!

Avoid the Foo Foo in Instructional Design and Performance Improvement

You Go Down The Learning Path to Go Up The Learning Curve – to go Up the Performance Competence Curve

Guy has been doing performance-based Training Paths and Planning Guides for clients since 1982. First published on Curriculum Architecture in Training Magazine in September 1984 and on the Analysis methods in NSPI's (now ISPI) PIJ in November 1984.

What Was Innovative in Curriculum or Learning Architectures in 1984 – Would Still Seem To Be Innovative Today – Why?

Celebrating – 30 Year Anniversary of this Publication – September 2014

How to Build a Training Structure That Won’t Keep Burning Down - Training Magazine - September 1984

Celebrating – 30 Year Anniversary of this Publication – November 2014

Using a Group Process to Create Models and Matrices - NSPI Performance & Instruction Journal - November 1984

Performance Development Paths

a.k.a.: Learning Paths focused on Performance Competence

Walk the Talk – of Processes Maturity

Walk the Talk – of Processes Alignment

Walk the Talk – of Processes Centricity

Myth Busting in L&D

Click on Image for the Post

In the Resource Tab…

3 Levers in EPPI – Enterprise Process Performance Improvement

Click Image to Link to the Post

The EPPI View of Processes and their Enablers and Enabling Systems

And the Enabling/ Provisioning Systems and Processes that enable the Enablers. Note that "Awareness/ Knowledge/ Skills" are just 1 of 12 categories of enabling Process Performance variables - when you include the design of the Process itself, first and foremost.

I Offer Over 150 Free Videos On This Site On the Topics of ISD and PI!